Skip to main content

What's behind rise and rise of Girish Chandra Murmu, Gujarat cadre IAS official

By Rajiv Shah
Girish Chandra Murmu. The very name amuses me. A 1985 batch Gujarat cadre IAS bureaucrat retiring next month, I still remember, during my interaction with him as the Times of India (TOI) man in Gandhinagar, his rather huge laughter (a loud “ha ha ha”) after he would frankly tell me what all was going on in the government. Now, the very same Murmu, 59, has been appointed the first Lieutenant-Governor of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir.
It has been widely reported, not once, but several times over, the role Murmu is said to have played as in the chief minister’s office (CMO) during Narendra Modi’s tenure in Gujarat – that his name came up during investigations into the 2002 riots and Ishrat Jahan encounter; and that he was "deputed” to tutor the witnesses who were to depose before Nanavati Commission in 2004, a charge leveled by RB Sreekumar, a 1971-cadre Gujarat cadre IPS officer.
But here I don’t want to talk about all this; nor is this about how Murmu – who looked after home affairs in Gujarat – continued to rise and rise after reaching Delhi when Modi became Prime Minister in 2014, though I was quite puzzled finding Murmu being appointed a joint secretary in the Department of Expenditure in 2015, following which was made special secretary in the Department of Revenue and secretary to the Department of Expenditure. Best of his top postings were in home, but never in finance in Gujarat.
Initially, when I first met Murmu, I found he would feel somewhat neglected. Many of his colleagues – both junior and senior – would joke on him as and when I would interact with them. I didn’t know what the reason was, but perhaps this had something to do with his humble background – he is a tribal from Odisha. In fact, looking back, I feel, he was more a victim of dominant sections in IAS. Many of them look down upon their "lower caste" colleagues, who belong to scheduled castes (SC) and scheduled tribes (ST).
Credit must go to Modi for spotting Murmu, a tribal, and allowing him to rise, albeit within the controversial framework as Gujarat chief minister
Seeking upward social mobility, I also found, there has been a tendency among some SC and ST IAS officials to hide their background. Some of them, for instance, never wanted to be addressed by their surname. One official, as collector in a North Gujarat district, even dropped his surname from his nameplate. When posted in Sachivalaya, he circulated a rather longish write-up in the Gujarat IAS email group explaining why he shouldn’t be called a Dalit.
Murmu, I feel, must be feeling a similar neglect, even as he may be seeking to climb up the social and bureaucratic ladder. Not without reason, a senior IAS official once quoted Murmu as wondering whether "these Brahminical IAS officials” would ever allow him to rise. “They wouldn’t allow me to go to Delhi in any case”, he said. Indeed, credit must go to Modi for spotting Murmu and allowing him to rise, albeit within his controversial framework as Gujarat chief minister.
Murmu, who told me once that he also held the red flag high during his student days, showed his mettle despite the fact that many of his colleagues would remind me that he wouldn’t be much of a success. In 2001, the year Modi took over, Murmu was relief commissioner, a post considered not so important among IAS officials. Thereafter he became commissioner, mines and minerals, where he held on to till 2003. Then, for less than six months, Murmu became managing-director, Gujarat Maritime Board, a relatively prestigious post.
This is the time Murmu left for a year-long foreign training. It is after his return in 2004 that Murmu’s real rise began, and has not stopped ever since. Murmu began looking after law and order in the home department, which was directly handled by Modi, who was in charge of home in the Cabinet, while Amit Shah was minister of state for home. In 2004, UPA came to power, defeating NDA, and it is during this period that he began handling riots-related cases in the home department, which he continued this till 2008, when he joined chief minister's office.
Murmu would handle particular care Amit Shah’s case papers files, going to Delhi whenever required for the fake encounter case
Between 204 and 2008, apart from remaining in home, Murmu took up every responsibility which Modi wanted him to take up, holding additional charge of posts considered unimportant. He took additional responsibility as registrar, cooperatives, and also managing-director, Gujarat Industrial Investment Corporation (GIIC), a defunct public sector undertaking. It was during this period, I believe, that Modi and Shah thought Murmu could be fully trusted.
Brought to CMO 2008, he continued handling home, a job he was already doing, and continued there till Modi left to Delhi as Prime Minister. All through, between 2008 and 2012, the period during which I interacted with him in CMO, I found him, as a “true” karmayogi, diligently doing all that Modi wanted him to do. If Modi did not want him to abroad for Vibrant Gujarat propaganda work, Mumru wouldn’t (he canceled his trip to Moscow, avoided going to US for a four months course), but promptly went to South Africa when Modi wanted him to.
It is during period that Murmu would handle particular care Amit Shah’s case papers files, going to Delhi whenever required, especially when the latter was in jail in the Sohrabuddin fake encounter case. When Shah applied for bail, Murmu is said to have done all the groundwork for Shah – something about which he made no secret while talking to his colleagues. He managed to see that Modi’s name is not dragged in at any point of time. In fact, Murmu’s ways pleased Modi and Shah so much that he was trusted more than the IAS officials who headed the home department.
His closeness to Modi and Shah was not of a typical bureaucrat, whose personal views would often differ from their public posture. I don’t want to name them, but many officials would praise Modi during interactions in the presence of a third person, but would go so far as to call Modi a “fascist” during one-to-one talk. Meeting me and other colleagues, Murmu, was, however, was clear in what he thought – that Modi should not be held directly responsible for Gujarat riots.
Murmu appeared to take the view which was controversially held a few weeks back by journalist Rajdeep Sardesai on Modi's alleged role in Gujarat riots
In fact, Murmu appeared to take the view which was controversially held a few weeks back by well-known journalist Rajdeep Sardesai. Even as refusing to agree or disagree to my query that Modi may have asked officials to allow people to vent their anger against Muslims following the Godhra train burning, in which 58 people were burnt alive, Murmu insisted, at that time Modi “lacked political acumen of an administrator”, as he had just taken over the reins of power. 
Murmu believed, Modi didn’t have administrative experience needed to direct officials what to do. In fact, Modi “didn’t know” whom he was dealing with, he felt. Insisting that, at that point of time, it was the duty of those who surrounding Modi to “tell the truth”, which they did not, Murmu told me, Modi may perhaps have been driven by the emotion of any Hindu leader in a given situation, when the train burning led to the death of kar sevaks in Godhra. 
Murmu didn’t blame Modi for having his constituency in mind – the Hindu voters. Instead, he blamed IPS and IAS officials for failing to advise Modi or acting the way they should have. As serving officials, they are supposed to act firmly when the situation demands them to, Murmu would assert, adding they should not be guided by the political thinking of their bosses. Yet, many officials acted as if they were never in the field, and refused to take firm decisions, evading tough decisions, for instance, when the Gulbarg Society was attacked, killing ex-Congress MP Ehsan Jaffri.
Blaming his IAS bosses who ruled the roost during the riots for acting in an “over-cautious manner, afraid of facing difficult situations”, Murmu pointed towards how one of them was “more busy” in analyzing Bhagwad Geeta than looking after the home department. With these types of officials, and crowds running amuck during riots, things were bound to happen as they had, he suggested.
What could Modi do, surrounded as he was by such officials?, I recall Murmu telling me. If Modi went wrong, what stopped these officials to act? It was a situation very similar to the 1984 Sikh riots. Rajiv Gandhi was a novice in handling administrative affairs, and the police officials in Delhi went indifferent, he seemed to think.

Comments

Jabir Husain said…
It could be a gift to deliver the music of inappropriate political masters for not working as per RULES, Constitutional governance, a post retirement blessings to hide all bad and old stories. Unfortunately, tax payers money is wasted. It is high time for Apex Temple of Justice to take due cognizance for pending justice in questions in related to citizens of both religios 58 karsevaks and 2000+ Muslims. Et, al Gujarat riot. Investigative book, The Gujarat Files by A. Rana!
GAJE SINGH said…
What about Hindus who killed them during Gujrat riot.
Uma said…
To make a small man important and then let him do whatever he wants is a common phenomenon. The small man does not realise that he will also be the fall guy if and when things go wrong.
P.S.R.SWAMI said…
Why nobody is blaming Muslims for burning public property killing tens of karsevaks resulting in retaliation leading to the Gordha riots? If it is.muslims burning it is.ok. I'd retaliated it is wrong. True officials will not wait for political orders.

TRENDING

Rushdie, Pamuk, 260 writers tell Modi: Aatish episode casts chill on public discourse

Counterview Desk
As many as 260 writers, journalists, artists, academics and activists across the world, including Salman Rushdie, British Indian novelist, Orhan Pamuk, Turkish novelist and recipient of the 2006 Nobel Prize in literature, and Margaret Atwood, Canadian poet and novelist, have called upon Prime Minister Narendra Modi to review the decision to strip British Indian writer Aatish Taseer of his overseas Indian citizenship.

Visually challenged lady seeks appointment with Gujarat CM, is 'unofficially' detained

By Pankti Jog*
It was a usual noon of November 10. I got a phone call on our Right to Information (RTI) helpline No 9924085000 from Ranjanben of Khambhat, narrating her “disgraceful” experience after she had requested for an appointment with Gujarat chief minister Vijay Rupani. She wanted to meet Rupani, on tour of the Khambhat area in Central Gujarat as part of his Janvikas Jumbesh (Campaign for Development).

There may have been Buddhist stupa at Babri site during Gupta period: Archeologist

By Rajiv Shah
A top-notch archeologist, Prof Supriya Varma, who served as an observer during the excavation of the Babri Masjid site in early 2000s along with another archeologist, Jaya Menon, has controversially stated that not only was there "no temple under the Babri Masjid”, if one goes “beyond” the 12th century to 4th to 6th century, i.e. the Gupta period, “there seems to be a Buddhist stupa.”

Church in India 'seems to have lost' moral compass of unequivocal support to the poor

By Fr Cedric Prakash SJ*
In 2017, Pope Francis dedicated a special day, to be observed by the Universal Church, every year, as the ‘World Day of the Poor’. This year it will be observed on November 17 on the theme ‘The hope of the poor shall not perish for ever’; in a message for the day Pope Francis says:

Gujarat refusal to observe Maulana Azad's birthday as Education Day 'discriminatory'

By Our Representative
The Gujarat government decision not to celebrate the National Education Day on !monday has gone controversial. Civil society organizations have particularly wondered whether the state government is shying away from the occasion, especially against the backdrop of "deteriorating" level of education in Gujarat.

VHP doesn't represent all Hindus, Sunni Waqf Board all Muslims: NAPM on SC ruling

Counterview Desk
India's top civil rights network, National Alliance of People’s Movements (NAPM), even as describing the Supreme Court's Ayodhya judgement unjust, has said, it is an "assault on the secular fabric of the Constitution". In a statement signed by top social workers and activists, NAPM said, "The judgement conveys an impression to Muslims that, despite being equal citizens of the country, their rights are not equal before the law."

Violent 'Ajodhya' campaign in 1840s after British captured Kabul, destroyed Jama Masjid

Counterview Desk  Irfan Ahmad, professor at the Max Planck Institute for the Study of Religious and Ethnic Diversity, Göttingen, Germany, and author of “Islamism and Democracy in India” (Princeton University Press, 2009), short-listed for the 2011 International Convention of Asian Scholars Book Prize for the best study in Social Sciences, in his "initial thoughts" on the Supreme Court judgment on the Babri-Jam Janmaboomi dispute has said, while order was “lawful”, it was also “awful.”